Alabama standoff over same-sex marriage channels George Wallace
There is no difference between what Chief Justice Roy Moore is advocating and what Gov. George Wallace did in 1963 when stood in a doorway to block integration at the University of Alabama. The federal courts, then as now, will prevail.
There is no difference between what Chief Justice Roy Moore is advocating and what Gov. George Wallace did in 1963 when stood in a doorway to block integration at the University of Alabama. The federal courts, then as now, will prevail.
Same-sex marriages went forward Monday in Alabama, for the most part, notwithstanding an effort by the Chief Justice of the state鈥檚 Supreme Court to prevent probate judges from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples:
This morning鈥檚 events came in the wake of an order issued late Sunday night by Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore who,聽as Steven Taylor has previously noted, has reacted to the recent federal court rulings on Alabama鈥檚 ban on same-sex marriage, in which Moore purported to order all of Alabama鈥檚 probate judges, who are responsible for issuing marriage licenses in the state, to ignore the federal court order:
Additionally,聽the United States Supreme Court declined to stay the federal court鈥檚 ruling聽with respect to the Alabama law, a move that many are seeing as a sign of how this issue will ultimately be decided by the justices later this term. In any case, though, Moore鈥檚 position here is as much nonsense as his position regarding the Ten Commandments monument that led to his dismissal from the bench more than 10 years ago. In this case, the federal judge鈥檚 order and finding have not been overturned on appeal and have not been stayed by either the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court. The assertion that the state courts, or other state officers, such as those involved in the issuance of marriage licenses, are not bound by the federal court order is quite simply absurd. Unless and until that order is overturned or its effect stayed, it stands as the law of the land in the state of Alabama. Even if an individual probate judge was not a party to the lawsuit that resulted in the issuance of the original order, if they refuse to comply with it, then they can be brought before the court in a separate proceeding and the result will be exactly the same.
At this point, there is no difference between what Roy Moore is advocating here and what George Wallace did when he stood before a doorway at the University of Alabama in an effort to prevent African-Americans from enrolling in the school notwithstanding a federal court order that this must happen. In both cases, we have a politician, and make no mistake about it, Roy Moore is acting far more like a politician than a jurist here, who is appealing to outright bigotry and openly defying a federal court order. Ultimately, the Supremacy Clause tells us that the federal courts will win this dispute, but it鈥檚 rather obvious that Moore and others like him will exploit this matter as much as they can before it's over. Meanwhile, though, at least some of Alabama鈥檚 gay and lesbian citizens are able to take advantage of the equality under the law they are entitled to. Let鈥檚 hope it isn鈥檛 too long before that expands to the rest of the state.
Doug Mataconis appears on the Outside the Beltway blog at http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/.